(untitled)

Phone "desktop" thread. Share yours. Critique others.

>>60538 Homescreen is the word you're looking for lainon.

>>60538 >>60540 I might as well also post this, since mine is pretty empty

>>60538 but i don't have one

>>60540 Ah, yes homescreen. Reposting mine since I accidentally hid the original behind a spoiler.

https://digdeeper.neocities.org/ghost/phones.html

>>60575 >posting soyjaks because someone needed to use whatsapp to text their family and friends >posting soyjaks at all You are mentally retarded. Go back to 4chan.

>>60582 I agree that >>60575 is mentally ill but you know you can just tell your friends and family you don't feel comfortable using WhatsApp and ask them to contact you on something like Signal. If the link to your friends and family is so tenuous that installing a single app is enough to stop contact forever, do those people really care about you? Be a nice person, put effort into your relationships, and I'm sure someone will put in the effort to move their thumb 1cm to the right when trying to contact you. Pic rel. is my spyware device that I still use and bought in 2015 for $150.

>>60583 Here's the picture I forgot to add...

>>60583 both signal and what's app require a phone number. they're both spyware as far as I'm concerned.

>>60588 I agree that Signal isn't great. - Still centralised - Requires phone number - Heavy - Difficult for casual users to transfer to new device - Creator is against decentralising it, putting it on F-Droid, and custom clients BUT - Not run by a for-profit company nevermind facebook - Essentially the best current encryption for messaging that even whatsapp has adopted - It's "modern" which means it functions like whatsapp so your "friends and family" can use it without thinking - Demonstrably, as shown in court documents, keeps minimal data about you - They're working on removing the phone number requirement. Note, the phone number was used so that they could leverage the already existing social graph you have on your phone instead of having to create that themselves and keep extra information about you. So it's just such a step up from WhatsApp in terms of privacy. I think it's pretty terrible software apart from the cryptography side of it but at least people are happier to use it than a self-hosted irc server.

>>60589 There are loads of custom signal clients. The signal client Molly-FOSS is on F-Droid. That's what I use on mobile. On desktop I use libsignal-cli

>>60590 >Molly-FOSS Oh yeah look at that you're right. I thought Molly was like Session, in that it's a fork with a seperate network. I'll have to have a look at that. My phone's so old that I'm looking for any software that's lighter so I can have the phone last longer. Thanks lainon.

>>60589 I think that Telegram is better option, because it's not US based. > Creator is against decentralising it, putting it on F-Droid, and custom client is HUGE red flag for me. No reason to be against custom clients unless you want an option to install backdoor to your users. Also Telegram FOSS is fully free while Signal contains google libraries (although not used without gapps) afaik.

>>60589 > Creator is against decentralising it, putting it on F-Droid, and custom clients Doesn't make any sense. It puts the trust into as few companies as possible which is bad. Although google/apple has excellent security (secure builds) and keen telemetrics (to find out when something is amiss on their clients) they cannot be fully trusted. I can trust F-Droid more "if I personally knew them". Both apple and google have done suspicious stuff in the past and I've read several horrible claims ranging from some user who "made employee x angry" so they fuarrrked with him on his accounts and then stuff like google pixel "repair service" stealing money and nudes. Nothing can be trusted. People can fuarrrk you up, your best friend or your family can kill you if you won the lottery. I can trust F-Droid more since their image is mainly about being open source and marking which apps are free or slightly non-free and making builds "just in case the original repo no longer exist" which is a smart tactic (and more privacy oriented than it is "security", you don't need security if you're some high profile anonymous (ournalist, billionaire, or whatever and throw away your electronics every week).

>>60777 >I can trust F-Droid more since their image is mainly about being open source and marking which apps are free or slightly non-free and making builds "just in case the original repo no longer exist" which is a smart tactic No. You can't. By using apps from F-Droid, you have to trust not only the developers of those apps, but also F-Droid if you use the official repositories, because they are the ones that compile the apps. F-Droid worsens the Android security model and shouldn't be used. https://wonderfall.dev/fdroid-issues/ >you don't need security if you're some high profile anonymous (ournalist, billionaire, or whatever and throw away your electronics every week). Wrong on so many levels. You cannot have privacy without security. Security keeps you in control of your data. Sandboxing and exploit mitigations protect your devices from malware which can invade your privacy. F-Droid only cares about freedom. Security is far more important.

>>60787 >https://wonderfall.dev/fdroid-issues/ F-Droid certainly has issues, but unfortunately I see no better alternative for now except building apps yourself. That article recommends Play Store for better security, which I found really ridiculous.

>>60787 play app signing and bundles are fuarrrking cancer. also google builds somehow have gsf requirement while some apps do not and I've seen apps that do not actually rely on gsf spit out "please install using google play" crap on me (however the apk from dev was clean and there are also some sources on appgallery which don't have gsf botnet in the way). they are probably tampering the builds "for security purposes" my ass. I don't need security, only anonymity on my phone without data to be stolen anyways, all important data are air-gapped. > Security keeps you in control of your data then enjoy getting your cellebrite backdoor with your up-to-date secure phone or have your pixel be remotely exfiltrated. maybe enjoy getting your entire browser tunneled into google amp because "you got lucky and got the special google chrome build somehow". theres more fuarrrking malicious app on playstore though, i've seen plenty of apps somehow installing supersu due to exploits on phones that do not support rooting yet! there's a reason FOSS app developers do not release exclusively on google play or FOSS app developers get rejected or their play license revoked. security is trash if the device is also trash, then you're asking your data to be mined by a company that's TOTL (top of the line) with such technology. imagine your "Trust"

>>60787 >No. You can't. By using apps from F-Droid, you have to trust not only the developers of those apps, but also F-Droid if you use the official repositories, because they are the ones that compile the apps. More people to trust is nothing new. By using the internet you have to trust them with your personal data going through their traffic logs, their unsecure and logging dns providers, their middleboxes and solarleak or whatever proprietary soykaf that comes in between, their cpe having gps coords and private ID/DPI, the cert authorities, the mitm cloudflare, IXP spying, proprietary BGP (only few use openBGP), etc etc. you trust more than a company on a daily basis or is unaware of it which simply trusting both F-Droid and the dev is nothing short of complicated and if anything F-Droid actually would strip the non-free or "freemium-locking" parts of the dev's source code when they can. >Wrong on so many levels. You cannot have privacy without security. Wrong on so many levels. A "secure google-signed and google-preinstalled phone" is a privacy nightmare without a doubt but security is a matter of hard compromise of privacy in exchange of botnet levels of telemetry (even more traffic than an actual botnet malware). You have to compromise, and security is simply but a matter of TRUST. I don't trust google after all that I've seen it do like a special build of google chrome that's locked to amp proxy or soykaf like activating "take a selfie" voice command the moment I touch their botnet infested. I hate the idea of having these spyware running voice recording all the time which should be illegal since it's fuarrrking illegal to even record other people's voice especially since I do not consent nor do I use their services. Voice assistants are stealing musician's unreleased stuff or some would-be-tech-billionaire's idea since they are not aware of the implications when sacrificing privacy for a device that screams "For real! We care about your privacy! (insert globalist human clipart with hands, pic related)" but at the end of the day there's some guy on silicon valley or sfca that can benefit from all of these stolen soykaf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_speech_interface. You can just simply read their site/services/device-os' tos + privacy policies + etc yourself to understand what I'm saying or if you;re not convinced your privacy is at huge risk despite the chant "We care about your privacy" which I'll also say to you "I pretty much care about your privacy too!" and those are nothing but legally hollow words. >F-Droid only cares about freedom. Most of their apps help high risk journalists and similar groups and it does its job very well since no other service can do that much work. If you use a non-free phone that is "secure" that is another journalist dead in the water. >Security is far more important. Security is only important if you're using your bank apps which a google device is excellent at and no more and no less. maybe lol use safebrowsing if you're scared of the big bad malware and phishing and have your 4chan posts linked into your social credit for its other "legally unintended" purpose (go lurky). Your idea of privacy+security aligns with them, good for you. But I ain't splaining soykaf all over again. Why don't your FOSS devs release it on play store? There's a reason. Why even use FOSS apps if you have gsf + voice assistant malware? I bet you have chromium installed and refuse to use ungoogled chromium since you think having hotword blob installed and spying on your linux machine's sound capture stream is fine 👌

>>60787 Security and Google are contradictory terms, friend.

Unfortunately my phone doesn't have a screenshot function. It doesn't even have a volume rocker. In addition, I don't have a camera that I could take a picture of the screen with, so I'll have to make do with a generic photo. >hur hur facebook It's not an actual fecesbook app, just a bookmark to the site in the terrible excuse of a browser.

>>60584 >Hoplite lmao isn't that the keyboard with the ancient Greek diacritics

>>60839 I think you're confusing security with privacy. Google has unbelievable security. How many people use Google? How many data leaks have there been? Compare that to basically any other company.

Why have I not heard of Kagi before?

>>60589 >- Essentially the best current encryption for messaging that even whatsapp has adopted What does that even mean though? I haven't used Signal or Whatsapp but I'm assuming Signal holds the encryption keys since it's centralised.

>>60848 That's very interesting. Mind sharing how you achieved that please?

>>61349 Just a weird launcher lol, it's a fun novelty but not much staying power for me, am playing with Square now but might pare it all down to a minimal CLI launcher

>>60754 Hm, I really like this. I use Olauncher which has a similar UI

>>61342 >but I'm assuming Signal holds the encryption keys since it's centralised No, the encryption key is stored on your phone. Technically they store part of the key and you store part of the key, I guess to prevent brute-force attacks, but they definitely can't decrypt your messages. Please don't just assume dumb soykaf like that.

>>60849 >lmao isn't that the keyboard with the ancient Greek diacritics Not in this case. Hoplite is a pretty great puzzle roguelike.

>>61342 The whole point of END to END encryption is that stuff in the MIDDLE can't see it.